12 comments:

While I have some personal reservations regarding abortion, for the Pro-Life types out there, know that for this Conservative, these sorts of fascist, terrorist acts assure that I will never support the "anti-choice" position.

Paul, I agree with your first point - however, when Islamic fundamentalists engage in violent acts to accomplish means, we call them terrorists.

So - to begin with, this was not simply "murder", it was a clear violent act to accomplish a political end. Terrorism. Let's not be coy.

Secondly, with Muslim extremists, I, and others, have strongly demanded that mainstream Muslims be unequivocal in their denounciation of terrorist acts.

Such is the case with this murder.

The agenda of the Pro-life movement borders on fascism from the get-go. A demand that others adopt their theocratic belief system. That, to begin with, is a non-starter for me. What flows from that, however, is a form of religious intollerance that is not less offensive than the act of those who took part in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

If religion of any kind wishes to truly be free of interference by the State, they had best assure than they are not seeking to become a direct influence in matters of the State.

You, Paul, are free to have your belief and to discuss and express that belief with others. My point is I am against abortion, but, will no longer support or advocate the agenda of the Pro-life crowd.

That's my perogative. And you can thank that sociopath whose name I will never mention for making my choice clear. I will vote against anti-choice legislation as long as I am able.

Now you've done it, Rob. Paul S. has launched into one of his patented lie-a-paloozas.

In case you don't know, he's been trolling this blog for years and has never once said anything sensible or on topic. And he always pretends that anything anyone says here is a marginal opinion. As if there aren't thousands of people who've denounced the pro-life movement as a terrorist movement in the last week.

Paul - I have no objection to people seeking to educate the public on their choices - I was a harsh critic of the U of C for seeking to prevent the Pro-life demonstration.. however, the fundamental problem I see with the Pro-life crowd is an inablity to conceive of the possibility that they might be wrong, that others should be entitled to disagree with them, and that the coercive power of government shouldn't be allowed to be used as a tool to enforce their view of morality on others.

And now - for me - the line is crossed such that I will now advocate for choice - not because I believe abortion is the right choice, but because I need to respect those who disagree with me, and, more importantly, I cannot advocate a position which is so rife with a lack of tolerance of other views and which, in my opinion, has led to this act of terrorism.

I'm not asking you to agree - and I know you won't. I'm just suggesting the more intollerant and the more strident pro-life views become, the more they begin to work AGAINST the cause they seek to advance.